Author Topic: Poison - It's an Edge (Read 517 times)

darkstorme · « **on:** June 12, 2006, 12:55:02 pm »

Now, I realize that for purposes of balance, people will shout me down on this, but I feel that it's a worthwhile point, so here goes:

<flamebait>
I think that poisoncrafting should be open to Rogues of all alignments, Druids, and possibly Rangers as well.

For Druids and Rangers, my reasoning is fairly straightforward - the number of toxins wielded by creatures of the wild (particularly in a magic-infused world) is amazing, so it's only natural that Druids and Rangers should acquire knowledge of the poisions they have to deal with; this would be both to gain a "natural" advantage (wild creatures use poisons, so why shouldn't they?) and to develop a more in-depth knowledge of antidotes, to treat those who run afoul of said poisonous beasts. In addition, Rangers might find a use for non-lethal toxins in the humane subdual of wild animals in human-populated areas.

And now we come to Rogues. Rogues, of whatever alignment, are opportunists. Whether they're diplomats, assassins, swashbucklers, thieves, or scouts, they're always seeking an edge. The stealthy Rogue will invest in insulated boots and coat his blades in lampblack to avoid the glimmer of steel giving him away in the shadows. The smooth-talker will learn how to fake a swallow, remaining sober while his target sinks deeper into incoherent intoxication. And every Rogue, given the opportunity, would make use of poison. Certainly, the good-aligned rogues would employ poisons that are painless and non-lethal - debilatating, perhaps, and possibly unconciousness-inducing (sleep toxins), but still, anything for the edge.

Given the choice in battle, any Rogue worth his or her salt would opt to hurl a dart coated in something suitably debilitating at an adversary, then focus their attention on the remaining foe. The Rogue ethos revolves around capitalizing on whatever presents itself, be it cover or a distraction - and a truly competent Rogue carries things far nastier than a simple numbing poison. (What I interpret a STR or DEX-drain poison to feel like.) Caltrops are nasty little pieces of work, and even a simple dagger slipped between the ribs is surely agonizing. How much kinder, then, for a dart to fly out of the darkness and prick your skin, to feel the spreading warmth of its payload, to see a black-clad figure, blurring as your vision fades, step out of the shadows... and never to feel the bite of steel?

Given their chaotic (or at best neutral - say what you will, there's virtually no proper place for a Lawful Rogue) nature, when faced with a significant evil threat (say, an evil wizard who holds the key to an innocent village's salvation from a monstrous curse), even a good Rogue would be tempted to dose the man with something slow-acting and painful, then proffer the antidote in exchange for the village.

In closing, then, poison would be sensibly (and RP-properly) applied by Rangers and Druids, and is absolutely indispensible to the Rogue. If necessary, RP-forbid the most ghastly and (if it's so desired) painful poisons to all but the most evil individuals - that makes perfect sense. But poisons that are merely temporarily debilitating are the very lifeblood of the Rogue's character. Let them make use of them again.
</flamebait>

There's my treatise. Feel free to take it apart in the name of "balance", but I feel it would enhance both RP and non-RP for Rogues (and to a lesser extent the other two classes) to have this included.

Just my two coppers.

Rayenoir · « **Reply #1 on:** June 12, 2006, 03:16:32 pm »

You seem to be blending the class of Rogue with the stereotypical "thief" of editions past. Speaking as a person who plays a character with rogue levels with no trap disarming ability, there is much more flexibility for the class than to assume that they cannot be lawful, or that all "competent" rogues should be using poison. I mean no offense, but perhaps you should have another look at what a Lawful alignment means in the scope of D&D. It does not just mean "law-obeying". The rogue class gives a set of abilities. Not an ethos or lack thereof.

also worth noting, that out of the nine alignments, more than half of them are able to use the poisoncrafting tool. The "Rogue" ideal you've described more than likely would be of an alignment to equip the necessary tool to poisoncraft anyway, as are four of the five possible Druid alignments. Alignments are a set of ethics and morality. I don't believe a LG rogue should be using poison without an exceptional reason, and I think that an NG druid should be doing exactly what NG means; using the forces of nature for the greatest benefit for all. Poison doesn't really strike me as a means of accomplishing that.

Thunder Pants · « **Reply #2 on:** June 12, 2006, 04:33:44 pm »

too be fair, even a LG Rogue should be able to use the poison crafting tool due to Use Magic Device

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #3 on:** June 12, 2006, 06:07:54 pm »

UMD is what gives Rogues thier use of the Poison Extractor... And Itell, you have to remember that there are only five unrestricted alignments on Layonara, and that only one of those unrestricted alignments is able to use the extractor.

Still... While I do agree with Storme's assessment of the Thief-Rogue ideal, there ARE other types of Rogues. The Swashbuckling Rogue, for example. I play a balanced Rogue that focuses mainly on the Swashbuckleresque skills, but still maintains some level of talent with traps and locks. He is not, however, the prototypical thief. In fact, depending on his mood, he'd either be offended or amused if you called him one. Due to the alignment restrictions on Layonara, the majority of Rogues are either sneaky scouts, or daring fencers/archers. Sure, the use of poison would appeal to my character in certain situations, but he is a very exceptional exception to his CG alignment - he's both very good, and very, very chaotic. Chaotic enough to appear Neutral on the G/E axis occasionally, but Good enough to sometimes appear Lawful on the L/C axis.

I, for one, have been pushing for permanently poisonable arrows and bolts for a while... Though we've not yet had any real Project Team input on the discussion, to my memory. I like the idea of being able to use the toxins, and, well... It opens up the CNR market to poisoners who otherwise simply make it to get Crafting XP. I have roughly a box of nicely powerful poisons, but I've not used them. Why? Too expensive for too short a duration and too little chance of them actually working. RP-wise, it would open up interesting venues for moral development on the part of my characters, which I'm always up for. Even legal issues! Think of it.

But all things aside... There are a lot of characters other than rogues who would be willing to use poison for the edge it gives. I'd love to see a Poisoning Kit like you see Silvering Kits these days - that's the ultimate goal in poisoncraft, as far as I'm concerned. But I'd settle for the arrows. If nothing else, it would give our archers (who really don't get the advantages of the TOTALLY AWESOME enhancements that melee-users get, for the simple reason that high-end arrows spend too quickly to be worth the price) another tool in thier fight against whomever. I mean, really, the Red Light Goblins get poison arrows, why not us?

As to Druids and Rangers... I agree, for the same reasons you state, but think about this. Druids on Layonara are the protectors of the balance. They don't kill unless they absolutely have to, excepting undead, of course. And poison doesn't work on the undead. Rangers? Eh. I can see it.

darkstorme · « **Reply #4 on:** June 13, 2006, 12:04:10 pm »

While I agree with the objections, I think some of my point was missed:

@Rayenoir - I'm a smidge affronted that you make this presumption. Did you read the linked article? If you're a Rogue, you have certain abilities, yes. But the Rogue doesn't have the stand-and-fight personality that comes with the toughness of the fighter. He doesn't have the firepower of a wizard or sorceror (save with scrolls, items, or multi-classing). Rogues, of all brands, are opportunists. Outside of the diplomatic corps, though, outline to me a LG Rogue. I've read the PHB and DMG cover to cover more times than I can count. The word "roguish" does not imply an individual who is concerned with society running along smoothly on bright little wheels. They may operate within the Law, or obey a strict moral code of some sort... but this doesn't change the fact that chaos provides the real power to the Rogue class.

In addition, the "more than half" of the 9 alignments includes the 4 restricted alignments, so unless you want to play a True Neutral character, the art of poisoncrafting is beyond your reach. I'm thinking, also, of Friar Lawrence from Romeo and Juliet. The draught he gave Juliet is probably a poison of some description... and he'd have to be quite accomplished in poisoncrafting to create it.

Note, also, that I didn't say that "all competent rogues use poison". Many surely do not. I said "in battle, all rogues will use whatever they can to gain an edge". Also (on reexamining my post) that competent Rogues carry far nastier tools than simple poison - and that's true of EVERY battle class, save perhaps a very careful mage. Edged and blunt weapons (except perhaps the sap) will cause greater pain than something like strychnine. And I would see a LG Rogue using paralyzing or strength-sapping poison in place of lethal weapons any day of the week (think tranquilizer darts). That and nonlethal damage (if that were coded in), would be the perfect pair for a Rogue who had an anethma towards killing.

@SZ - You'll note I made reference to the Swashbuckler and the Diplomat in addition to the Thief or Scout - both could nake good use of poison in the right circumstances. Without tremendous skill, it's difficult NOT to kill someone you're fighting with a sword - unless, say, you've coated your blade in a poison that induces unconsciousness. Then it just takes a nick, and you don't have to kill your opponent. (Or, if your opponent is irrevocably evil and MUST die, they can die painlessly.) As for the diplomat, even if they don't use poison themselves due to moral obligations, they would be horribly remiss and naive if they weren't ALLOWED to poisoncraft. If they don't know what the poisons look/smell like, how could they defend against less morally-upright diplomats?

For the evil/unscrupulous, poison is a means to your opponent's death. For the good/moral, it can be a means of easing suffering or avoiding bloodshed. Either way, poison in and of itself should not be restricted to evil or unscrupulous people - just the use to which it is put.

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #5 on:** June 13, 2006, 12:37:25 pm »

Personally... I would like to see some in-game prohibitions on the use of poisons (some pretty heavy-handed ones, too), but I don't like the idea of restricting its use using mechanics. It's like, say, putting a skin on all Druids that they don't do any damage to anything with the Animal type. Or to not allow LG to do damage to anything non-evil.

Doesn't make much sense. *He shrugs.* If the character wants to study poisons, let them. Whether or not they use the poisons is a matter left up to the character.

darkstorme · « **Reply #6 on:** June 13, 2006, 12:48:44 pm »

Well, and classically, the great sages have immense knowledge of poisons. The fact that they don't use them doesn't factor in. And a number of rulers carefully built up resistances to various poisons by incremental dosage exposure (though they would be best described as LN, or, in Rasputin's case, CN/CE). Which brings me to another thing that might be neat to add to the poisonmaker's art - when you get to 10th or 11th level of poisonmaking, your exposure to poisons gives you a +1 to saves against the stuff. (This is just wishful thinking at this point.) Regardless, poisons should be open for anyone to make.

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #7 on:** June 13, 2006, 01:11:18 pm »

Those fellows took the Strong Blood or Snake Blood or whatever feat to get resistance to poison.

Let's hear something from project team, eh?

Flaron1990 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 13, 2006, 08:23:30 pm »

My personal thought about poisons is that they shouldn't be restricted. I play a CG wild elf rouge. Now a wild elf would normally learn what plant to eat, and ones not to eat (poisonous). So naturaaly (as a rouge) he would learn which things are poison and use them to his advantage.

Now... as it comes to mind... poison isn't the only frowned upon trade that PC's can get into. For instance Trap making is an fround upon, and some of the traps have Acid which can be more torturish then a poison.

darkstorme · « **Reply #9 on:** June 14, 2006, 12:25:53 pm »

@SZ - Snake Blood's a first-level-only feat, though. It'd be nice to see something indicative of careful dosage exposure. As I said, that's not the primary issue, however. I want poisons opened up, at least to Rogues - anything else in this thread is secondary.

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #10 on:** June 14, 2006, 12:46:52 pm »

Poisons are already opened up to Rogues, though I must say, I read the article and have never seen such a bit of munchkinism in my life.

Poisons are open to a Rogue with a few ranks in UMD. Otherwise it's limited by alignment for EVERYONE.

I'd rather see poisons opened up to everyone.

darkstorme · « **Reply #11 on:** June 14, 2006, 01:11:10 pm »

I don't know about munchkinism - aside from using WIS as a dump stat, most of the rest of what he does is reasonable, not min/maxing. (Well, the WIS is min/maxing, but nevertheless.) I was more after the initial section - that is to say, personality. When it gets into game mechanics, you may as well leave it alone.

Can anyone poison a blade with a vial of poison? I've not had Kell try out a Poison Extractor just yet because, mechanics or not, I thought it was against IG rules for non-evil (or CN/TN) characters to advance in Poisonmaking. It's not as if the poison extractors are magical - they're just verboten to the good (and LN) alignments.

I mean, it wouldn't make much sense if anyone could use a vial of poison to coat their blade, but only evil people could make the stuff.

Regardless, I agree. Everyone should be able to study poisonmaking - it's a craft like any other - and someone has to make rat poison in cities, after all, even if it never sees battle.

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #12 on:** June 14, 2006, 01:18:43 pm »

Anyone can coat a blade with poison provided they make the Dex check. And there's no rule against characters doing poisoncraft, but there are In-Game laws against it.

*He shrugs.*

darkstorme · « **Reply #13 on:** June 14, 2006, 02:13:00 pm »

Hrm. One would think that if there were laws against it, there wouldn't be a poisonmaking table in the Crafting Hall. And to paraphrase the popular saying, If Poisonmaking is outlawed, only outlaws will have poisons!. Regardless, I'd still like to hear the take of a member of the Dev team on this.

(Poison for all! Rah rah rah!)

Ne'er · « **Reply #14 on:** June 14, 2006, 02:13:08 pm »

In my opinion, there really shouldn't be any restrictions to use poisons at all. After all, my cleric of Sulterio is Lawful Neutral, the only alignment a cleric of Sulterio can play without being evil. So what's wrong with that? Sulterio is the God of Poison, and it would kinda make sense for him to be able to use poison.

I agree with what was said earlier about using game mechanics to restrict poison use. If people have a good RP reason to make poison, they should be able to. If they don't, then they shouldn't make the poison. Like back to the animal thing Stephen brought up. Druids CAN hurt animals, but your not really considered a good druid if you do, and other druids would disown you and refuse to work with you. It should be the same with poison. The LG paladin of Toran CAN make poison, but the church would likely cast him out and he likely wouldn' stay a paladin of Toran long.

Yosemite Sam · « **Reply #15 on:** June 14, 2006, 02:43:22 pm »

If it was against ingame rules to use the poison table, how come no one ever said anything to Perago, or Lue?

lonnarin · « **Reply #16 on:** June 18, 2006, 09:32:37 am »

ahhhh... the use magic devicers... using their magic-manipulating powers on items non-magical in order to circumvent moral and philosophical restrictions?

That would be exploiting and abusing a skill in a way it was not intended...

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #17 on:** June 18, 2006, 12:07:36 pm »

The only reason Pyyran relies on his UMD skill is because it removes a restriction that didn't make sense in the first place. When Pyyran wants to research poisons, he does so. When he wants to use them for the edge they give, he does. The mechanical restriction is as metagame-ish in itself as the solution to it.

Yosemite Sam · « **Reply #18 on:** June 18, 2006, 12:45:27 pm »

Hmm, if the item is not magic, than UMD will not work. If it is, then UMD lets the user simulate, race, alignment, class feature, etc. If the item is not magic, than what physically prevents people from using it? Oh yes, what an exploitation, poison was extracted out of a venom sac! Call out the greater powers, such unbalanced acts must not be allowed.
Quite frankly your arguement reminds me of an arguement I had long ago with someone who is now a dm. I was told that Perago, as a elf, should have more respect for the forest and should stop chopping down trees. I replied that he wasnt, he was picking up windblown branches to make arrows. The game doesnt let you do that. Well, I a RP that is what I am doing. Just because you dont think I should doesnt mean I have to it your way, unless your name starts with a big L here in Layo.
Its a limited game, expect creative people to work around the limitations. Doing so is not always an exploit.

Leanthar · « **Reply #19 on:** June 18, 2006, 01:15:04 pm »

No more personal attacks folks. If it happens again this topic gets locked.